The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

In light of the background leading up to each of the instant crimes, the means and methods of committing each of the instant crimes, and the circumstances after committing each of the instant crimes, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant was in a state of mental disorder because the Defendant was unable to keep the mental state at the time of committing

Therefore, even if the court below did not decide on the defendant's assertion of defectiveness, the omission does not affect the conclusion of the judgment, and thus, this part of the ground of appeal cannot be accepted.

In addition, examining the records in light of the relevant legal principles, we affirm that the court below found the defendant guilty of the damage to property among the facts charged in the instant case, the invalidation of public documents, and the insult.

In so doing, contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors in finding facts contrary to logical and empirical rules or by misapprehending the legal principles on emergency evacuation or legitimate acts.

Meanwhile, under Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the ground of unfair sentencing may only be lodged by death penalty, imprisonment with or without prison labor for an indefinite term or for not less than ten years. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence was imposed on the defendant, an appeal is not allowed to be filed with the Supreme Court on the ground

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.